We carried out a review of the data available to us about Salters Meadow Health Centre on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Salters Meadow Health Centre, you can give feedback on this service.
We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Salters Meadow Health Centre Health Centre on 12 June 2017. The overall rating for the practice was good with requires improvement in safe. The full comprehensive report on the 12 June 2017 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Salters Meadow Health Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 11 January 2018 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 12 June 2017. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.
Overall the practice is now rated as Good.
The practice had ensured that fire evacuation drills were planned and undertaken.
Safeguarding systems for adults and children were in place. The practice had also introduced electronic read codes to enable the practice to readily complete patient searches. These were specific to the practice rather than the use of codes suggested by the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) which would enable continuity should a patient relocate.
A system for managing patient safety alerts which included a check that appropriate action has been taken had been implemented.
The practice had ceased accepting repeat medicine requests by telephone and completed a risk assessment to determine which medicines should be routinely carried when performing home visits.
The practice had implemented processes to demonstrate that the physical and mental health of newly appointed staff had been considered to ensure they were suitable to carry out the requirements of the role.
The practice was recruiting to their practice nursing team at the time of the inspection. This was due to staff choice in reducing their clinical hours and retirement this meant appointment capacity had reduced in the short term and winter pressure demands had increased.
We also saw the following best practice recommendations we previously made in relation to providing services had been actioned/addressed:
Elderly patient’s annual health check reviews were being implemented with a structured approach with the application of the practice frailty register which was an ongoing process.
A formal system to review nurse/patient consultation and prescribing records had been implemented to ensure the competence and safety of nurses employed to work at the practice.
Signage to inform patients on the availability of chaperones was evident.
The practice clinical meeting agenda included clinical guidance updates to assist in the monitoring of adherence to clinical guidelines.
The regular appraisals for all staff included the identification of training needs additional to the mandatory courses.
The process for recording verbal complaints had been reviewed which enabled any trends to be identified and actioned.
The GP clinical rota pattern included capacity planning and the practice demonstrated that an additional four appointment slots per GP had been enabled with the successful recruitment of GP partners.
The provider should:
Consider a system to monitor and risk assess both clinical and non-clinical staff immunisation and vaccination histories.
Implement the recall system to invite patients on the learning disability register for annual health checks.
Consider the use of the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) electronic safeguarding read codes.
At our previous inspection on 12 June 2017, we rated the practice as requires improvement for providing a safe service an example of one of the improvements to be made was to implement a call/recall system to invite patients on the learning disability register for annual health checks. At this inspection we found that this system had been discussed but had still not been introduced. The practice had advised that recruitment of staff and staff changes had impacted on their ability to achieve this since the last inspection in June 2017. The practice had since recruited two new GP partners and was interviewing for practice nurses the week of the inspection. They assured us that patients on the learning disability register would be invited for annual health checks before the end of the year.
Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of Salters Meadow Health Centre on 25 February 2015, the overall rating was Good. The practice was rated as requires improvement for providing well led services and good for providing safe, effective, caring and responsive services. The inspection report can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Salters Meadow Health Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
We took action against Salters Meadow Health Centre by issuing a requirement notice in relation to Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014 (good governance).
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 12 June 2017 carried out to check that improvements had been made (it is policy that if not re-inspected within 12 months, we carry out a comprehensive inspection to re-rate the practice). Overall the practice is now rated as good.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
Importantly, the practice must:
The areas where the provider should make improvement are:
Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Salters Meadow Health Centre on 25 February 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.
Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring and responsive services. It was also good for providing services for older people; people with long-term conditions; families, children and young people; working age people; people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable and people experiencing poor mental health. It required improvement for providing well led services.
Our key findings were as follows:
However, there were also areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.
Importantly, the provider must:
In addition the provider should:
Chief Inspector of General Practice